Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Dreamliners or Nightmares: Why Has India bought the troubled Boeing 787
Despite more than a decade to work out problems and an estimated $20 billion to build it, Boeing’s 787 aircraft is still plagued by issues. Ever since 787s finally began flying in 2011, there have been technical and mechanical problems, from software bugs and engine defects to faulty wiring, trouble with hydraulics and fuel tank leaks. (www.newdelhitimes.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Dredging up a compendium of historical "snags" (typical British terminology) on a still relatively young and revolutionary airplane design is nothing more than prejudicial editorializing that should be disregarded for what it is, an opinion hit piece.
Pushpak bête, do not confuse ideology with reality. Born and bred in Bangalore long before you, it am confident in my assessment. I still love my mother country for what it gave to me to go on.
Empirically speaking, when comparing the "composite" fleet, Air India has four times as many Airbuses as 787's. And which ones are breaking in an inordinately higher proportion?
Depending on one's point of view (or sense of nationalism) one could claim that these are just teething problems (some major), or you could say this airplane is indeed a "maintenance turkey" because it was built by committee and outsourced in too many directions -- in an attempt to leapfrog Airbus in areas pioneered by them 30 years ago. IMHO the plane is a "Zebra."
All one has to do is read in detail the full Wikipedia entry, among other sources of information, before one jumps conclusions which attempt to cloak the 787's problems by killing the many messengers, or by blaming Third World countries.
The underlying current of superiority and nationalism, as seen so often in the comments on this subject, are very obvious. ("We're the best and our airplanes are the best." ) Therefore it's the Third World MRO's fault for buggering up these thoroughbreds--they're really not zebras at all.
Fact is, there are more 787's based in the First and Second World, and Asia, than there are in the "Third World." But yet, the problems continue to be reported from all "Worlds" -- not just the New Delhi Times.
One has to ask; how come those Third World MRO's aren't breaking other modern (composite) airplanes--or is it that these 787's are indeed a lot more fragile and finicky? Hard to admit?
Depending on one's point of view (or sense of nationalism) one could claim that these are just teething problems (some major), or you could say this airplane is indeed a "maintenance turkey" because it was built by committee and outsourced in too many directions -- in an attempt to leapfrog Airbus in areas pioneered by them 30 years ago. IMHO the plane is a "Zebra."
All one has to do is read in detail the full Wikipedia entry, among other sources of information, before one jumps conclusions which attempt to cloak the 787's problems by killing the many messengers, or by blaming Third World countries.
The underlying current of superiority and nationalism, as seen so often in the comments on this subject, are very obvious. ("We're the best and our airplanes are the best." ) Therefore it's the Third World MRO's fault for buggering up these thoroughbreds--they're really not zebras at all.
Fact is, there are more 787's based in the First and Second World, and Asia, than there are in the "Third World." But yet, the problems continue to be reported from all "Worlds" -- not just the New Delhi Times.
One has to ask; how come those Third World MRO's aren't breaking other modern (composite) airplanes--or is it that these 787's are indeed a lot more fragile and finicky? Hard to admit?
"Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."
The fact it can be edited by absolutely anyone makes its reporting less than reliable. Might be accurate, might not be. So using Wikipedia as your source flaws your conclusions.
The fact it can be edited by absolutely anyone makes its reporting less than reliable. Might be accurate, might not be. So using Wikipedia as your source flaws your conclusions.
Dump it to the Indians, they will take anything if they think it is a status symbol, including being left out the loop in 787 problems........twisted thinking!
If I could I would have just given you 50 thumbs down.
Give me the 737, 747, MD80, MD90.